In the 3 articles read, all where major voilations of privacy rights. Some schools got in trouble when they disobey the 4th admentment rights and went beyond there intuall purpose. In the first article about the 13 year old girl who was stripped search for allegelly hiding ibuprofen. She was searched in a manor which was illegal and an embarrassment to the school . When the court covered the issues they quoted "We are pleased that the Supreme Court recognized that school officials had no reason to strip search Savana Redding and that the decision to do so was unconstitutional".
In the second article of the case of cell phone, a girl's phone was searched and innoportite pictures were found. Privacy again is being intruded. Like the TLO vs NJ case, the teacher who saw the phone is going beyond the purpsoe of the search.
In the 3rd reading of Burlison v. Springfield Public Schools,Central High School announced over the public address system that the school was going into "lockdown" and that students were prohibited from leaving their classrooms. This also violates the rights of the students (1st admentment) and there lockers where searched which is violating the privaxcy policy.
In all these cases schools have gone too far in searches.
There needs to be a line on what is appropriate for a search and when privacy is being invaded. It is one thing to pee in a cup but another to make a student feel uncomfortable.
No comments:
Post a Comment